The boom
experienced
by the libre software movement and its unlimited possibilities,
together with the
growing success enjoyed by software libre tools in the commercial and
business
world, has overshadowed a number of key issues that are inherent to the
movement. We are of course referring to open standards, which are core
elements
to achieve the interoperability of software applications. Standards are
what
set the rules of the game for many aspects and functionalities of
software
tools. Compliance with standards, whether de facto or de
iure, is
what can make or break an application. Much of the software development
going
on today is guided by standards, as is the much vaunted issue of
“software
quality”.
For this
reason the scant interest aroused by standards in recent years is even
more
surprising. Obviously, an application is more exciting (and useful)
than a
technical standard, especially if it is an open standard. However, the
former
are impossible without the latter. Most of the protocols on which the
communication
and transfer of information over the Internet is based are open (or
nearly
open) standards. The World Wide Web Consortium
directs its efforts
towards formulating and accepting standards in the knowledge that
without
standards it would be impossible to carry on developing the Web and its
advanced information services. But this seems to be contradicted by the
lack of
standards for what is the most widely created and disseminated
information
worldwide: the information stored in office automation documents.
Whoever
controls users’ desktop controls their applications. And 80% of all
computer
users work with classic desktop applications, with a word processor or
a
spreadsheet. Office work in companies, the work done in public
administrations
or in educational environment, are examples of the intensive use of
office
automation applications. The information they use, generate, and
transform is
stored in office automation documents. The formats of these documents
have
become de facto standards which have cunningly imposed their
‘rules’ on
all users These rules, which are often abusive, limit freedom of
choice,
compatibility, and interoperability, and oblige users to consider as
normal a
series of costs that, in any other context, would immediately be
denounced as
monopolistic abuse and contrary to the principles of fair competition.
To have a
standard is, by definition, recommendable. A standard establishes
requirements
and the rules of the game. However, a standard may be used in such a
way as to
create undesirable results, especially when patents and legal
constraints that
favour one party over another are involved. For this reason it is
essential for
standards to be open, developed in a spirit of collaboration among
equals, and
for their specification not to contain hidden constraints that make it
hard to
use. If these standards also ensure all citizens the right to access,
store,
and transform digital information, regardless of the platform used,
they
immediately acquire an incalculable economic, social, and political
value.
OpenDocument
is a standard (the only standard) for office automation
documents which
sets out all the desirable characteristics that should be found in such
documents. Its version 1.0 has been endorsed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), as
ISO/IEC standard 26300:2006. It is the result of the open,
collaborative work
of all the main players; software developers, solution implementers,
and
end-users. It is public and free of charge, and the legal requirements
included
in the standard prevent any partial or abusive use. It also makes use
of other
open standards within its own specification, such as XML, SVG, and
Dublin Core.
OpenDocument had already been developed
and approved as a standard by the Organization for the Advancement
of
Structured Information Standards, OASIS, in 2005, which ensures its
continuing support and development by the main industry players.
However,
OpenDocument is not just a format standard for office automation
documents. The
underlying philosophy is different. Some may argue that a standard is
nothing
more than a technical issue, and in purely formal terms they may be
right. But
the technical excellence of OpenDocument, which is undoubtedly superior
to that
of any existing office document format, is a product of the underlying
philosophical approach and the way in which this philosophy has been
applied to
working methods and techniques, and to the resultant end-product. The
adoption
of an open and democratic collaborative working method has made it
possible to involve
all interested parties, thereby ensuring that all their many and varied
demands
are addressed. The involvement of industry interests ensures the
presence of
standard-compliant products on the market, which in turn ensures
inter-platform
portability and interoperability. Any citizen can access the document
containing the technical specification, which means that the
information
contained in OpenDocument format documents are not subject to arbitrary
decisions
by third parties. This open approach also encourages competition
between products
and, given a range of options, users are free to choose the one they
think is
best suited to their needs, or the one that is most technologically
advance. This
independence is not only desirable; it is essential and inevitable.
The OpenDocument
format is prepared for the semantic Web. All tagging complies with the XML standard
and documents may include the Dublin
Core metadata standard (ISO 15:836:2003). Various output can be
obtained
using XSLT. As they are XML-tagged text documents, the tools and
libraries for
search engines such as Lucene or Xapian are able to process them with a
minimum
load. For example, by combining with other standards it is possible to
generate
Topic Maps (ISO/IEC 13250:2003) from document content, with all
that can
mean for the development of information extraction and representation
systems.
One issue
that is of paramount importance, which is often completely neglected,
is the preservation
of digital information. Although many organizations seem still to be
unaware of
it, the medium- and long term retention of digital assets, most of
which are
stored in office automation documents, is a growing concern, both due
to
knowledge management issues affecting the organization itself, and due
to legal
issues related to their activity. While there is a standard for the
long-term
preservation of electronic documents (ISO 19005-1:2005) using PDF, the
fact is
that it is only valid for final versions of a document. OpenDocument is
able to
keep an activity log of the content of a document, and can “remember”,
say, the
formulas used to reach a mathematical result. Add to this the growing
demand
for records and document management in the field of public
administrations, companies,
etc., which also have their own set of standards (ISO 15489-1/2:2001 Records
Management; UNE/ISO 15489-1/2:2006 Documents Management),
and it
would seem clear that OpenDocument has a long future ahead of it and
plenty of
ground to cover.
Useful
References on ODF
The
following references, along with those included in the articles this
monograph consists of, will help our readers to dig deeper into this
field.
